Supreme Court revisits Texas affirmative action in new case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

The "opportunity" you describe was provided to you over someone else (white/Asian) who had better qualifications and in case of Asians, someone who experienced the same discrimination and marginalization (as well as language/cultural issues on top) but worked hard to achieve academic success. Many Asians attend mediocre public schools and do not enjoy advantages upper-middle class students enjoy. Why should they be passed over based on race?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

"whose spot I filled"? Sounds a bit entitled doesn't it? Spots in universities aren't owed to any of us. Why was it her spot any more than mine? It wasn't like my university had said "these are the absolute admission requirements." Admissions are hardly playing God, they're making imperfect decisions, filling classes against some vision of what the class should look like and using criteria broader than a one-time score on a test to determine acceptance. The reality is, any white body who didn't get into my university probably got in somewhere else. If they had fortitude and/or access to opportunities (that their white skin might more likely afforded), then they're doing fine. There is a lot that is imperfect about the execution of AA, but you won't find me shedding tears over whites or Asian being excluded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

Really? I don't believe for one minute any of you are really concerned about the person that missed his spot. If they were worthy of that spot, then they probably got a spot somewhere else equally as good. AA is probably coming to an end and maybe it's time, but I'm not crying for all the supposed missed spots by Asians, whites or anyone else for that matter. What I am concerned about is the injustices that lead up to non-white students being in this position to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

"whose spot I filled"? Sounds a bit entitled doesn't it? Spots in universities aren't owed to any of us. Why was it her spot any more than mine? It wasn't like my university had said "these are the absolute admission requirements." Admissions are hardly playing God, they're making imperfect decisions, filling classes against some vision of what the class should look like and using criteria broader than a one-time score on a test to determine acceptance. The reality is, any white body who didn't get into my university probably got in somewhere else. If they had fortitude and/or access to opportunities (that their white skin might more likely afforded), then they're doing fine. There is a lot that is imperfect about the execution of AA, but you won't find me shedding tears over whites or Asian being excluded.

I know.

That's why it's about time for the Supreme Court to prevent universities to keep discriminating folks on the basis of race.

The beneficiaries of racism, or reverse racism, never complain. And why should they?

Fortunately, we live in a country with a color-blind Constitution.

Time to apply it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

"whose spot I filled"? Sounds a bit entitled doesn't it? Spots in universities aren't owed to any of us. Why was it her spot any more than mine? It wasn't like my university had said "these are the absolute admission requirements." Admissions are hardly playing God, they're making imperfect decisions, filling classes against some vision of what the class should look like and using criteria broader than a one-time score on a test to determine acceptance. The reality is, any white body who didn't get into my university probably got in somewhere else. If they had fortitude and/or access to opportunities (that their white skin might more likely afforded), then they're doing fine. There is a lot that is imperfect about the execution of AA, but you won't find me shedding tears over whites or Asian being excluded.

Your statement regarding Asians demonstrates that indeed you are all about me me me. You see, there are plenty of Asians shedding tears because they are excluded and rejected despite overcoming discrimination and achieving way more than most admitted students through hard work and determination. They will shed tears of joy when the AA is finally ended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

"whose spot I filled"? Sounds a bit entitled doesn't it? Spots in universities aren't owed to any of us. Why was it her spot any more than mine? It wasn't like my university had said "these are the absolute admission requirements." Admissions are hardly playing God, they're making imperfect decisions, filling classes against some vision of what the class should look like and using criteria broader than a one-time score on a test to determine acceptance. The reality is, any white body who didn't get into my university probably got in somewhere else. If they had fortitude and/or access to opportunities (that their white skin might more likely afforded), then they're doing fine. There is a lot that is imperfect about the execution of AA, but you won't find me shedding tears over whites or Asian being excluded.

Your statement regarding Asians demonstrates that indeed you are all about me me me. You see, there are plenty of Asians shedding tears because they are excluded and rejected despite overcoming discrimination and achieving way more than most admitted students through hard work and determination. They will shed tears of joy when the AA is finally ended.

+100

(just to clarify, I'm a different poster, and I'm not Asian. But I do find the current system absurd and discriminatory)

[Anonymous]

When the Asians decide to lobby and band together to become more politically powerful, this affirmative action crap will disappear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

The "opportunity" you describe was provided to you over someone else (white/Asian) who had better qualifications and in case of Asians, someone who experienced the same discrimination and marginalization (as well as language/cultural issues on top) but worked hard to achieve academic success. Many Asians attend mediocre public schools and do not enjoy advantages upper-middle class students enjoy. Why should they be passed over based on race?

+1

[Anonymous]

I've noticed that many left-leaning papers now use terms like "exploitation" and "plantations" to describe college football programs, with the obvious race-baiting implications. The narrative is that those poor black football players are apparently being duped by Big Bad Whitey into playing football for free.

The NCAA really should ban colleges from allowing academic concessions for athletes. That would instantly solve the "exploitation" problem by limiting athletics to real students, like the ivy's do. Most of these football players wouldn't even be able to get into the school to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've noticed that many left-leaning papers now use terms like "exploitation" and "plantations" to describe college football programs, with the obvious race-baiting implications. The narrative is that those poor black football players are apparently being duped by Big Bad Whitey into playing football for free.

The NCAA really should ban colleges from allowing academic concessions for athletes. That would instantly solve the "exploitation" problem by limiting athletics to real students, like the ivy's do. Most of these football players wouldn't even be able to get into the school to begin with.

Lol - the NCAA is run by several Big Bad Whitey's and the only color they care about is green so there is no way in hell they're going to just abandon a farm system that brings in 1.3 billion in profits annually just to ease your discomfort with left-leaning papers using terms like "exploitation" and "plantations".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've noticed that many left-leaning papers now use terms like "exploitation" and "plantations" to describe college football programs, with the obvious race-baiting implications. The narrative is that those poor black football players are apparently being duped by Big Bad Whitey into playing football for free.

The NCAA really should ban colleges from allowing academic concessions for athletes. That would instantly solve the "exploitation" problem by limiting athletics to real students, like the ivy's do. Most of these football players wouldn't even be able to get into the school to begin with.

Lol - the NCAA is run by several Big Bad Whitey's and the only color they care about is green so there is no way in hell they're going to just abandon a farm system that brings in 1.3 billion in profits annually just to ease your discomfort with left-leaning papers using terms like "exploitation" and "plantations".

Where are you getting this 1.3 billion in profits? Most college football programs lose money or break-even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've noticed that many left-leaning papers now use terms like "exploitation" and "plantations" to describe college football programs, with the obvious race-baiting implications. The narrative is that those poor black football players are apparently being duped by Big Bad Whitey into playing football for free.

The NCAA really should ban colleges from allowing academic concessions for athletes. That would instantly solve the "exploitation" problem by limiting athletics to real students, like the ivy's do. Most of these football players wouldn't even be able to get into the school to begin with.

Lol - the NCAA is run by several Big Bad Whitey's and the only color they care about is green so there is no way in hell they're going to just abandon a farm system that brings in 1.3 billion in profits annually just to ease your discomfort with left-leaning papers using terms like "exploitation" and "plantations".

Where are you getting this 1.3 billion in profits? Most college football programs lose money or break-even.

Let's look at the top three money-making programs...
The University of Texas had the biggest profit of any program last season, earning $74 million, while the University of Michigan, which pocketed $64.6 million, was number two. That explains how Michigan could outbid the NFL when it hired former San Francisco 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh last year. The University of Alabama ranked third with $53.3 million in profits. Those figures are based on a CNNMoney analysis of 2013-2014 figures submitted to the U.S. Department of Education by each school. They show that the 64 schools in the five major conferences brought in a combined $2.8 billion in revenue last year, mostly from broadcast rights and ticket sales and since teams don't have to pay their players, they keep nearly half of that revenue. Speaking of broadcast rights, ESPN agreed to pay $7.3 billion to broadcast the new Division 1 playoffs for the first 12 years of the new system.
College football is an extremely profitable enterprise, and it's raking in even more money thanks to the new playoff system.

[Anonymous]

There are a handful of schools at the top who make money. After the top 5-10, they all lose money or break even. Due to the fact that most schools have athletic departments and boosters that are considered to be financially separate entities, there is plenty of room for interpretation.

That CNNMoney analysis is the only article I have ever seen that claims that the majority of schools are making a big profit. Most other sources are consistent with the "most schools don't profit" on college football. They make a lot of money, but paying coaches, staffs and flying large numbers of people around and putting them up at hotels eats up almost all of it.

I recall reading that the University of Florida athletic department made a big deal about how they donated around $1 million back to the school. Are we to believe that all of those big football schools are making tens of millions in profit every year, but only giving a 1/20th of those "profits" to the school? If college football really make that much profit, where does it all go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Texas 75% of a class is admitted using class rank, eg top 10 percent (now it is less than 10 percent). The remaining 25% is admitted holistically including a long list of factors. Race is one of those factors. Ms Fisher, a double legacy, did not meet the 10 percent threshold. To me the facts matter.

In addition, test scores are not everything. I don't think going to a system where test scores are the only factors considered. People successfully matriculate from colleges without perfect or even high test scores.

Thanks for bringing it back to this. This case has bugged me for a while because her standing is so tenuous. She was not a competitive candidate to UT Austin, period, regardless of her race given aspects of her application. It was a reach school for her and she did not get in.

So you've concluded she was "not a competitive candidate" because she did not meet the top 10% threshold. But, minority applicants who did exactly as well as she did should be considered competitive specifically because the are not white? Really?